Post navigation

“Epilogue: Bush v. Gore and the Constitutional Right to Vote”

Sam Issacharoff and Rick Pildes have posted this draft on SSRN (forthcoming: Michael Alvarez and Bernard Grofman (eds), Election Administration in the United States: The State of Reform After Bush v. Gore, Cambridge University Press). Here is the abstract:

This essay provides a look at the legal landscape regarding the right to vote that has emerged in the wake of the 2012 elections. Courts have begun using Bush v. Gore to craft an intermediate form of equal protection scrutiny to address barriers to voting or the manipulation of voting requirements when the state’s justifications for these constraints are thin or unconvincing. The essay also focuses on the emergence of Early Voting as a central feature of current democratic participation and the ways in which courts have begun to understand Early Voting as a legal category. The essay serves as an epilogue to a social science volume on voting reform edited by Michael Alvarez and Bernard Grofman, Election Administration in the United States: The State of Reform after Bush v. Gore. The essay ends with a tentative assessment of the emerging new equal protection jurisprudence.

Cheap Speech and What It Has Done (to American Democracy), First Amendment Law Review (forthcoming 2018) (draft available)

The 2016 U.S. Voting Wars: From Bad to Worse, William and Mary Bill of Rights Journal (forthcoming 2018) (draft available)

Essay: Race or Party, Race as Party, or Party All the Time: Three Uneasy Approaches to Conjoined Polarization in Redistricting and Voting Cases, William and Mary Law Review (forthcoming 2018) (draft available)